The symbol of present governing elite in Latvia - spinelessness! (updated)

It was rumoured yesterday that the president would arrive to the Saeima, the Latvian talking shop to deliver his constitutional amendments en route to Beijing Olympics. Today the president was able to deliver mere inconsequential speech scolding MP's for their lack of work ethics, abrupt end of the tripartite discussions with the trade unions, and bad communication skills. President specified that those 40% of Latvian voters who participated in Saturday's referendum wanted to dissolve the parliament and president reminded that MP's should take such a fact into consideration. Also president blamed parliamentarians for the lack of initiative and particularly blamed them for not coming out with their own version of the constitutional amendments.

The president is either naive, or he is buying more time. If he is naive then nobody can help him. If he is trying to buy more time, then I am afraid that he has no clue about the extent of discontent in the Latvian society. V. Zatlers caught media attention in Bucharest NATO summit whilst supporting Georgia's and Ukraine's aspirations to be awarded the membership action plan with his ominous phrase": "no plan, no action". To paraphrase the author of these words, "if there is no time-frame for constitutional amendments, there is no action from the Saeima". If the present Latvian MP' s are not pressured they simply lack any initiative. It seems that the president has not realized that, and foolishly believes that perhaps MP's consider him as the authority (it is enough just to read opinion of Gundars Bērziņš to learn quite the contrary).

It is not easy for the former surgeon (V.Zatlers) to understand nuances of the post-Soviet governance, and I believe that the whole speech was poorly staged show. The same speech could have been aired in radio, or TV. Why is there need for the speech if MP's are not even allowed to debate after it? After all, it was announced right after the referendum that the president called for the emergency session of the parliament (Art.20) where he planned to use his rights of legal initiative (Art.47), and thus the speech would be about the consequences of the August 2 referendum. The speaker of the parliament and presidium, who are entitled to announce the emergency session according to the Article 20 of the constitution, thought that there is a need for the presidential monologue only. Thus, as a protest the opposition New Era (JL) party members left the parliament building. In the meantime opposition parties collected 1/3 of signatures that are needed (Art.20) for calling another emergency session of the parliament.

Opposition parties (JL, Civic Union, Reconciliation Centre, Artis Pabriks and Aigars Štokenbergs) want to discuss a motion that would prepare constitutional amendments enabling no less than 1/10 of the voters to initiate dissolution of the parliament in today's emergency session. The motion stipulates that the sub-committee should be created and the bill of the constitutional amendents should be finalized until October 1, 2008 in order to pass those constitutional changes during autumn 2008 session of the parliament.

The conservative majority seems to sleep on their laurels while the discontent in the society is brooding. There is no decisive action from the majority unless they are forced so by referendums or opposition disobedience actions. Spinelessness, no rational discussions and absolute lack of the long-term political planning is the best description for the behavior of the present majority clique in the parliament. To conclude, I want to use a comment in Diena about the presidential speech by the author named Ceplis. He was poignantly true when describing today's emergency session of the parliament.

"Prezident, pabariet mūs un aizrādiet par nepadarīto, bat atcerieties, ka tikai ar mēru... nu jūs jau saprotiet, lai cilvēki domā, ka pēc tā notiks aktīva rīcība !" Kalvītis, Daudze, Šlesers u.c. koalīcijas deputāti. [Mr President, scold us and make remarks about our unperformed tasks! But in the meantime you should remember not to exaggerate...you must understand that the folks out there should simply believe in decisiveness of your speech! Kalvītis, Daudze, Šlesers a.o. governing coalition MP's ]

Updated

The Saeima emergency session is over just before 12.00CET and the opposition's demand for another emergency session was voted down. Today the Saeima official joker Juris Dobelis (TB/LNNK) was able to shine in the limelight of his own populism again. Prior voting on opposition motion J. Dobelis announced "that nothing should be done in a hurry", and continued with the idea that the referendum about constitutional amendments was a crushing defeat for the 600 000 people who came, because they are minority vis-a-vis those 900 000 naysayers or persons who did not come to referendum at all. Dobelis underlined that there are saboteurs who want to undermine stability in the republic, and he also suggested listening to the Lithuanian PM, who said to BNS another day that initiatives about constitutional amendments probably were prepared with the "methods prepared by the Kremlin's spin doctors."

So be it, and the Latvian population is scared by its so called leaders again. Prior the referendum those were PM and the speaker of the parliament, and now it is the official joker of the parliament. There are multitude of persons who listen to these scary tales, and they do not understand that it is a smokescreen for diverting attention from the fundamental problems of the Latvian governance - questionable work of legislators reflected in nonexistence of mandatory property and tax declaration system, faulty political parties financing law, criminal code and dysfunctional tax regime. Finally, the fact is that if in other European countries governing and opposition parties cannot work together because of the constitutional crisis they dissolve the parliament themselves. Latvian politicians, president included, are spineless and forgetful about the roots of the present discontent - the stolen elections in October 2006 and thus the untouchables feeling represented by the majority coalition MP's. Thus, there is no one to call for snap elections and the rat race a'la letton continues.

The head of the judicial committee Vineta Muižniece (People's Party-TP) announced that sub-committee for preparation of the constitutional amendments is being created under auspices of the judicial committee. However, there is no time-frame provided and it means that those amendments can be easily dragged through the corridors of the Latvian parliament until September 2010. So be it now until the next referendum on August 23.

No trust and accountability expected from the spineless rulers of this ...

Photo: Evija Trifanova

and this hall...

Constitutional amendments after the referendum on constitutional amendments? (updated)

The ominous referendum is over. Forty percent of the eligible voters or 2/3 of the voters who participated in the parliamentary elections in 2006 announced that they are not satisfied with the way their republic is governed. In any European democracy the political elite should take such forceful show of political participation into consideration. Latvian present "political clique" is of different breed. Except the PM Godmanis the rest of the governing coalition bigwigs assume that the majority of population is content with the way Latvia is ruled. So be it with the present Latvian "political elite", and they can really enjoy their Pyrrhic victory for a little while.

In the meantime it was an announcement of historic magnitude that came amidst the ongoing referendum campaign. Last Friday the TV3 "Nekā Personīga" show was the first media outlet that disclosed the ill famous "Lembergs stipend list". The latter is the notorious list to what also the former president Vīķe Freiberga was referring in her farewell speech in Saeima, the Latvian parliament. Last May she rather ominously concluded in her speech that "the sword of Damocles" is hanging over the heads of certain politicians, and for the sake of cleaning up the Latvian political environment she asked the leaders of political parties to start the "purification process" themselves. It is obvious today, that leaders of political parties do not care about such ethical suggestions particularly from the retired president, because they are scared. They are afraid to lose their material benefits, because most of the party members have taken mortgage, leased a car, and are also busily eager to fill their pension funds. It means that if they should lose their MP seat, they would have problems finding another job, thus just thinking about probable future discomfort makes them to behave the way they behave.

The president has called for the extraordinary session of the parliament although the Art. 46 of the constitution gives him the right to convene only the extraordinary sessions of the Cabinet. Perhaps the president is in hurry to make it to Beijing Olympics, thus such a hurry. Nevertheless, he announced that he wants to use his right (Art.47) to initiate legal amendments. He is planning to submit his version of constitutional amendments that would allow qualified number (250 000) of voters to initiate the dissolution of the parliament among other things. President's amendments were prepared by the group of constitutional law experts and led by the member of the European Court of Human rights Mr Egīls Levits.

So called president's amendments are upgraded version of the amendments on Art. 78-79 proposed by the popular motion, and voted upon last Saturday. If president is serious about the need to pass those constitutional amendments he should make it as an ultimatum for the parliament to pass them till the end of the autumn session around Christmas, as suggested by Iveta Kažoka. Also former Minister of Foreign Affairs Artis Pabriks contemplates about same ideas, and suggests that in case the parliament would not act swiftly the president should act decisively and use his constitutional powers. After all, the president has a power (Art.48) to initiate the dissolution of the parliament.

Will it be possible to elect accountable and politically responsible representatives to fill those seats...
Photo: Saeima

I doubt about the ability of the 9th Saeima members to change their behavior. Delfi reported yesterday that the PM asked his coalition partners about possible resignation after learning the referendum results, but they had convinced him not to do it. Also Diena quotes the head of the People's Party (TP) fraction head Mr Kučinskis saying: "president strongly overestimates the ability to pass those constitutional amendments until the end of the year. Until that date the document could be passed only in the first reading."

Problems of the present government and Saeima stem not from suddenly 610 000 voters being dissatisfied. The reason for dissatisfaction is faulty and very often questionable legislation - the slow process of the anti money laundering law just being the most vivid example here. Such examples as I just mentioned are myriad, and loopholes in existing laws allow different interest groups have an inordinate influence on the way the country is governed.

Now, we should wait until the legal amendments of the Latvian president would be given to the parliament tomorrow. It is interesting, whether he would stipulate the need to have also certain time frame for this law to be passed in the parliament? Without a specified time frame MP's can easily delay their legislative duties until the next legislative elections in October 2010. And there is the August 23 referendum coming as well, thus to manipulate the outcome of the forthcoming referendum Latvian parliamentarians could actually make miracles and pass president's constitutional amendments prior this ominous date!?

Updated

Diena just reported that opposition Civic Union (PS) party has prepared their version of constitutional amendments and delivered them to the Saeima presidium. Reasons for such a sudden legislative rush are twofold. First, when popular amendments were voted down in the parliament, then the constitution stipulates that they must be voted in popular referendum without any amendments. Second, there are rumours about a possibility of the president not actually delivering constitutional amendments but the opinion of his constitutional commission instead. The president on his way to meet his Chinese counterpart apparently wants just to signal the parliament that they should bear in mind the real raison d' etre of the past referendum. Anyway, the primary task of the legislative branch is to legislate (!), and regardless of the president delivering his commission's amendments or just opinions about possibility to change the constitution there is one opposition party that acted already

The PS is actually using the legislative initiative from the past times. Just prior the coup d'etat in May 15, 1934 Latvian MP's already failed to pass the amendments that would allow 1/10 of the electorate to dissolve the parliament. The PS proposes to change the Art. 14 ("the electors may not recall any Members of the Saeima.") of the Satversme as follows: "no less than 1/10 of the electors may initiate the referendum about dissolving of the parliament. If majority of voters wants to dissolve the parliament, that is not smaller than the half of the total number of participants in the last elections, then parliament is sacked and new elections must be announced which must take place no later than two months after the referendum. Electors cannot recall single members of the Saeima"

Reasonable proposal indeed, and shall see what will be the text that the president is planning to deliver to the parliament tomorrow. Also, rather ominously already the speaker of the parliament Mr Daudze announced that there will be no debates after the speech of the president (!), because according to G. Daudze there is nothing to debate after presidential speeches...(douze points:-)

Go and vote AYE on August 2, 2008!

Campaign goes on in earnest, and there are several political parties and interest groups (SCP, JL+PS+VL+Mozaīka+ Tautvaldība, SC) that actively agitate voters to not just participate, but to vote AYE in the forthcoming referendum. The latter is about the Saeima bill No. 695, that the parliament's Legal Affairs Committee rejected on May 28, and that also majority MP's refused to pass on June 5. Today the major conservative People's Party (TP) is the first political party, that cowardly asks its voters not to take part in the referendum about constitutional amendments. Such TP behaviour shows how shallow is their comprehension about democratic governance. Instead of asking their supporters to participate in democratic plebiscite and vote against the motion: "TP cannot call its voters to take part in the referendum, because the amendments lack substance and create substantial risks to constitutional stability." ("nevar aicināt savus vēlētājus uz dalību referendumā, jo iesniegtie grozījumi ir nepārdomāti un rada būtiskus konstitucionālus riskus.")

Amendments to Articles 78 and 79 of the constitution would allow not just the president, but also 1/10 of eligible voters to submit a draft resolution calling for procedure that would initiate the dismissal of parliament. Under the current language of the constitution (Art. 48), only the president is entitled to initiate dissolution of the Saeima.

First, in case between 500 000-700 000 Latvian voters would say AYE in the forthcoming referendum, it would most probably force the president to consider whether he should yield to the popular pressure and use his constitutional rights as outlined in the Article 48 of the constitution. And second, if 756 000 voters would say AYE the parliament would have to yield to the will of the people and constitutional amendments become valid. After the amendments would be passed the new procedure (to already established one in Art. 48-50) for possible dissolution of the parliament would read as follows:

- public motion starts with collection of 10 000 notary approved citizen's signatures and submitting them to the Central Election Bureau;
- then signature campaign would follow where at least 1/10 of the Latvian voters (circa 149 thousand) , signatures must be collected and the result submitted to the parliament;
- then parliament would be voting;
- if parliament rejects public motion then plebiscite is announced where half of the electors who participated in last elections must participate for considering the referendum valid;

- if majority (50+1) of those who participated would vote AYE only then parliament is considered dissolved, and the further procedure would follow as outlined in Art. 48-50 of the Satversme.

In case any of aforementioned two scenarios would be achieved the president would have to call for a new referendum, and ask whether Latvian voters want to sack the existing parliament.

P.S. Just to remind those who forgot already. The existing parliament was illegally elected in October 2006 after governing People's and Latvian Way/Latvian First parties breached the Law on funding of political organizations.